Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
gussy

I need help losing weight and getting back in shape

Recommended Posts

Dude even the crappy sleep you're getting is made even worse because of the apnea. Talk to your Dr about that. Just google all the illnesses apnea causes. You get that under control and you'll have way more energy. I was like you, now I don't travel anywhere without my machine. Huge difference in my life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James Daulton has lost a lot of weight so he may be a good resource, but I pretty strongly disagree with his #1. Also not crazy about his #2.

It's been shown in study after study, if you have a consistent caloric deficit you will lose weight. Now this weight will consist of both muscle and fat, but you will lose fat. Maybe some other method like low-carb, paleo, whatever will let you lose 20% more fat or something, but the noise you have to go through is not worth it for someone who's just starting.

As for #2, that's what's been successful for me. If he can be perfect 7 out of 7 days, all the better. I was just trying to give him a real world strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and get your wife to join you in this. 5'6 and near 200 is way way too big for a woman. From a % of bodyweight perspective, she's likely has more to lose than you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grabbed a Smart Ones Turkey Sausage Egg Muffin for breakfast on the way out the door. Processed, yes, fit's in to my calorie requirements and it was easy and close.

One thing I think I'm going to quickly figure out is my sleep habits have a large part in this. Was up late last night after my wife's party, house was hotter than hell, trying to clean some stuff up, broke a freaking plate at 11:30, cut myself on both hands, got pissed off, was probably 12:30 or 1 before I fell asleep, which led to me sleeping until almost 8AM, trying to be to the office by 9, scrambling around, trying to figure something out so I wouldn't go to McD's. I think good night sleep, up earlier = time for exercise, breakfast at home, etc. Now I'll be scrambling trying to fit a walk in, kid has a basketball game at 5, an away game, busy day at work.

I think I need to do a much better job of planning for sure, and we really need to make a trip to the grocery store to get better, easier to get to, things in the house. May try to survive on an apple for lunch, have a 1PM appointment, and the other option is going home and making up some tuna I guess. Initially had thought about trying to hit the store this morning for a yogurt and apple to take to work, and grabbing either a small sirloin or a chicken breast to go home and grill for lunch, but the late start to my day already has my day getting away from me.

Tasker, thanks for the advice. Not fishing at all. Sugary drinks aren't really my problem, outside of sweetener in my coffee. 1-2 diet soda's a week is about it, and giving those up isn't hard for me.

Dude...that has to taste like cardboard. You are never going to survive eating stuff that tastes like crap. If you must eat breakfast, which I think you should skip, don't eat crappy frozen breakfast foods.

Eat a piece of fruit and some peanut butter. Or, go to McDonalds and get an egg mcmuffin. The egg is a real egg, the muffin is a muffin that is like 95% of the other muffins out there, there is a piece of cheese and a tiny sliver of canadian bacon. Once again, everyone is giving you bad advice. Telling you to avoid McDonald's might seem smart in their eyes, but in reality it might be doing you harm. You're going to eat crappy frozen cardboard-tasting muffins, then you will crack and quit your diet.

Grab an Egg McMuffin and an unsweetened tea from McDonald's every single morning. 290 calories. Who cares. It's probably one of the few things at McDonald's that's actually not that bad for you and you seem to like it. Don't make it hard on yourself in areas that you don't need to. Just skip the hash browns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright dude, I'm going to give you a simple, straightforward plan to lose weight.

Step 1, Worry about calories only. Not macros or sugar or ingredients, calories only. Of course you should mix in veggies and healthy food, but calories are they key to losing weight.

Step 2, evaluate your results not daily, but weekly. If you're successful 5 days and unsuccessful 2 days, it's likely you'll still be good for the week.

Step 3, mix in some low impact exercise like walking a couple of times/week.

Here's the plan, your TDEE (basically the calories you burn just being alive and going about life with no exercise) is around 2,450/day. Your goal should be to consume between 500 - 750 calories fewer than this per day. So that gives you an allocation of in the neighborhood of 1,800 calories per day. I don't care where your calories come from, if you stay around 1,800/day, you'll lose weight. Next, the booze, you have got to limit it to no more than 2x/week max. Even limiting it this much can still cause problems for you. Say on the two days you booze, your calories increase to 4,000/day. These two days alone result in a 3,100 calorie excess, eating up all but 650 calories of the other five days (assuming you average 1,800/day). Now here's where the walking comes in. For every 1/2 hour you walk at a reasonable pace, assume you'll burn around 100 calories. Say you walk 2.5 hours/week, that's an additional burn of 500 calories which would give you a 1,150 calorie deficit for the week. This is with going off the rails twice. Not a huge deficit but a deficit nonethelss. In enough time, you'll reach your goals. If you can limit the damage on the booze days or walk more, you'll have even better results.

I always think in terms of not trying to be perfect but for every step back, take three forward.

By the time summer comes you won't recognize yourself.

This is great. Similar to my post but more logical and easier to understand. Do this gussy. Don't let 100 people cloud your mind. Go simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James Daulton has lost a lot of weight so he may be a good resource, but I pretty strongly disagree with his #1. Also not crazy about his #2.

It's so silly to disagree with it. Why? Did it work for JD? Then why do you disagree with it? Do you know how many people have lost tons of weight on weight watchers or doing myfitnesspal?

There are people that succeed and fail on all sorts of diets/lifestyle plans. Half of the problem is that people seem to "take sides" and then someone that is struggling with weight finds a plan they like (gussy seems to like JD's post), then reads 4-5 other people ripping it and saying "no it's not the calories you have to eat clean". Then he gets frustrated because he doesn't want to put effort into something that everyone is saying will fail!

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Gussy isn't going to make it on chicken, veggies and granola. That's easy to see. So he needs to find the plan that works for him and execute longterm.

Edited by shader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James Daulton has lost a lot of weight so he may be a good resource, but I pretty strongly disagree with his #1. Also not crazy about his #2.

It's so silly to disagree with it. Why? Did it work for JD? Then why do you disagree with it? Do you know how many people have lost tons of weight on weight watchers or doing myfitnesspal?

There are people that succeed and fail on all sorts of diets/lifestyle plans. Half of the problem is that people seem to "take sides" and then someone that is struggling with weight finds a plan they like (gussy seems to like JD's post), then reads 4-5 other people ripping it and saying "no it's not the calories you have to eat clean". Then he gets frustrated because he doesn't want to put effort into something that everyone is saying will fail!

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Gussy isn't going to make it on chicken, veggies and granola. That's easy to see. So he needs to find the plan that works for him and execute longterm.

The overwhelming majority of people that lose weight on Weight Watchers gain it all back. Something like 95%. Crappy food generally is very low in satiety. So counting your calories but continuing to eat crap will leave him hungry all the time. At some point he'll give in to the hunger. That's not a moral failing, it's just the way humans are.

Don't say gussy "can't make it on chicken, veggies and granola." He can eat good foods. You're being more dismissive than I am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just going to do a little heroin now. Should be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeo man i agree i with you. Honestly you might get jumped on because I of all people agree with you but I'm 22 and just know my own body limits. I am a normal person not like i am naturally gifted with a super muscular body. If i eat #### food i make sure i work out twice as hard and much as i usually do. By #### food i don't mean fast food either though i just mean like sweets and things high in sugar. Ive earned my body and i am damn proud to say that. Make sure you only eat 3 Solid meal a day and if you get into a strict workout regime change that to 5 or 6 meals a day but cut the calories per meal in half. when you are LOSING WEIGHT YOU WILL ALMOST ALWAYS BE HUNGRY. This is because you stomach is stretched farther than usual and wants to fill up on fat. Ignore this for the first week. Once you start eating healthy foods you will be almost always full all the time. After my each meal which i have 5 times daily I am full even though it isn't as much as what i could physically eat till i was stuffed. Being full and being stuffed are completely different things. As i said before it has to be a lifestyle change and only you can change your body. HOW BAD DO YOU REALLY WANT IT is what it comes down to. If your just like ehhhh well i would like to be fit then well I'm sorry to tell you but you will be fat slob the rest of your life. If you do really care you will change your own lifestyle.

IMO if you've eaten poorly for a long time then you need to shock your body by fasting for a day or two. It's very difficult but it's amazing how much of a difference it makes in regards to feeling satiated. Your stomach gets used to a certain amount of food in order to feel full, but if you can give it a break you will notice a huge difference in the amount of food it takes for you to not feel hungry.

Your body also goes in to fat storing mode when it feels deprived.

https://thefastdiet.co.uk/forums/topic/food-thought-fast-day-starvation-mode/

A more recent experiment on the effects of short term calorie restriction, Resting energy expenditure in short-term starvation, produced very different results. In this experiment they took 11, healthy volunteers and asked them to live on nothing but water for 84 hours.

The researchers found that the volunteers’ basal metabolic rate went up while they were fasting. By day 3 it had risen, on average, by 14%.

One reason for this may have been the significant rise they detected in a catecholamine called noradrenaline, which is known to burn fat.

Short term fasting works. The article mentioned the evolutionary perspective - imagine if when people just ran out of food their bodies shut down until food arrived. Instead what I believe happens is that when you run out of food your brain gives your body a jump start to go find more. If that doesn't work then the body will go into starvation mode and hope someone else gives you food because your hunting skills must suck.

Edited by cstu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SW Ranch salad from Runza for lunch before client meeting at 1PM (she's late) Actually really good, salsa instead of salad dressing, pretty low calorie, can't remember, I looked it up. Walked to the bank earlier today instead of driving. Thought it may be the only way I'd get some steps in, but that may not be the case now. On a good news/bad news note, my kid texted me and told me he's not playing tonight because he's failing math. This is from my straight A student, so disappointed, but on the other hand, means I can skip the game and actually get a good walk in late this afternoon and hopefully have a good healthy dinner tonight.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yo, gus, me too, and I'm a living institution for lifestyle change vs diet.

I lost a ton of weight before my wedding this summer. I felt great. June came and went, my pictures were awesome compared to where I was a year prior, my main goal was to have wedding pictures I could be proud of. Hell, I was up to running 5k

And then the wheels fell off. As of Thanksgiving I'm back to where I was, +3 pounds.

I opened a thread about my twitch account. I'm not hiding myself, you can see the fat in my chin and face there plastered in front of the world (all 5 people that tune in to watch). But I'm going to look back at my old VODs a year from now and be a completely different person. I can envision my end goal. Already started my journey, and after having read this thread, I feel empowered by the support you've been given. I'm committed to the lifestyle change.

So let's do this. I'm taking all the money I'd throw away on bad food and instead throwing it away on tailing frosty and lumpy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Gussy isn't going to make it on chicken, veggies and granola.

What wrong with chicken, vegetables and granola? Why can't he eat those things? I had some granola for breakfast this morning. This stuff. It's delicious. It's not perfect but it's miles better than what he's eating now. You're telling him to eat an egg mcmuffin every day? He's addicted to salt, fat and hydrogenated oils. They dominate every meal he eats. Look at the ingredients of an egg mcmuffin. It's fat, sodium, oil and god knows what else. 730 mg's of sodium. He has high BP. How is that good for someone who's trying to get healthy? Here are the ingredients of the smart ones sandwich he had this morning:

Ingredients: English Muffin (Water, Enriched Flour [bleached Wheat Flour, Malted Barley Flour, Niacin, Reduced Iron, Thiamine Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid], Whole Grain Wheat Flour, Yeast, Contains Less Than 2% of Acetylated Potato Starch, Calcium Sulfate, Degermed Yellow Corn Flour, Degermed Yellow Cornmeal, Fumaric Acid, Potassium Sorbate [Preservative], Salt, Soybean Oil, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Vinegar, Wheat Gluten), Cooked Egg White Patty (Egg Whites, Cornstarch, Xanthan Gum, Annatto ), Cooked Turkey Breakfast Sausage Patties (Poultry Ingredients [Turkey, Mechanically Separated Turkey], Water, Contains 2% Or Less of Salt, Spices, Sugar, Natural Flavoring), Pasteurized Process American Cheese (Cultured Milk, Water, Cream, Sodium Phosphate, Salt, Lactic Acid, Sorbic Acid, Artificial Color, Sodium Citrate, Enzymes). Contains Wheat, Egg, Milk.

How can anyone read those ingredients, see the nutritional information and believe this is a good meal to start the day?

I agree that he's getting bombarded with too much information and strategy. How about going super simple and just trying to eat ONE good meal? For dinner one night this week plan one piece of lean meat or fish with some healthy vegetables. Vegetables that aren't overly salted or served in a cheese sauce. Just something like broiled fish, green beans and a yam. Basic and easy. Just one single meal. Start there. Worry about nothing beyond that. One healthy meal. Call it "the beginning".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The overwhelming majority of people that lose weight on Weight Watchers gain it all back. Something like 95%. Crappy food generally is very low in satiety. So counting your calories but continuing to eat crap will leave him hungry all the time. At some point he'll give in to the hunger. That's not a moral failing, it's just the way humans are.

Don't say gussy "can't make it on chicken, veggies and granola." He can eat good foods. You're being more dismissive than I am.

Plenty of healthy foods besides those that taste good. My view is that eating foods with a lot of sugar, sodium and saturated fat makes you feel like ####. Since you aren't getting positive bio-feedback from your diet you simply give up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James Daulton has lost a lot of weight so he may be a good resource, but I pretty strongly disagree with his #1. Also not crazy about his #2.

It's so silly to disagree with it. Why? Did it work for JD? Then why do you disagree with it? Do you know how many people have lost tons of weight on weight watchers or doing myfitnesspal?

There are people that succeed and fail on all sorts of diets/lifestyle plans. Half of the problem is that people seem to "take sides" and then someone that is struggling with weight finds a plan they like (gussy seems to like JD's post), then reads 4-5 other people ripping it and saying "no it's not the calories you have to eat clean". Then he gets frustrated because he doesn't want to put effort into something that everyone is saying will fail!

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Gussy isn't going to make it on chicken, veggies and granola. That's easy to see. So he needs to find the plan that works for him and execute longterm.

The overwhelming majority of people that lose weight on Weight Watchers gain it all back. Something like 95%. Crappy food generally is very low in satiety. So counting your calories but continuing to eat crap will leave him hungry all the time. At some point he'll give in to the hunger. That's not a moral failing, it's just the way humans are.

Don't say gussy "can't make it on chicken, veggies and granola." He can eat good foods. You're being more dismissive than I am.

I agree and told him so earlier.

The majority of people that lose weight gain it all back. Doesn't matter if it's weight watchers, primal, or whatever the diet is. If he watches calories, he's going to have to learn to cut out crap food (for the most part) or he will fail.

There are those that don't eat any crap food. I worked with a guy that hasn't had fast food in 15 years, hasn't had soft drinks since high school and makes all his dinners and works out 1-2 hours a day. Yeah, those people exist. But not everyone wants to be those people.

Arizona Ron is wrong. Sugar isn't heroin. It's not dangerous. You can't overdose on it and die. Those type of statements are ludicrous and don't help anyone.

But sugar can kill you over a long period of time if you over-consume. It also can be consumed in moderation and be part of a perfectly fine lifestyle. What makes more sense: helping someone learn to eat sugar properly, or telling someone to do without something because it's "crap"?

Edited by shader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hip-E was pimping some granola and before I clicked I thought Bare Naked and voila!

I also saw others posting just count calories...XXX and I only say that because I push for a huge surge in water and flushing out of impacted fecal on the bowels. I'm really advocating a detox and if you can detox/fast to kick off a weight loss run, that's a huge step up. The crap that still comes with the 290 morning calories is not good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SW Ranch salad from Runza for lunch before client meeting at 1PM (she's late) Actually really good, salsa instead of salad dressing, pretty low calorie, can't remember, I looked it up. Walked to the bank earlier today instead of driving. Thought it may be the only way I'd get some steps in, but that may not be the case now. On a good news/bad news note, my kid texted me and told me he's not playing tonight because he's failing math. This is from my straight A student, so disappointed, but on the other hand, means I can skip the game and actually get a good walk in late this afternoon and hopefully have a good healthy dinner tonight.

Good choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arizona Ron is wrong. Sugar isn't heroin. It's not dangerous. You can't overdose on it and die. Those type of statements are ludicrous and don't help anyone.

But sugar can kill you over a long period of time if you over-consume. It also can be consumed in moderation and be part of a perfectly fine lifestyle. What makes more sense: helping someone learn to eat sugar properly, or telling someone to do without something because it's "crap"?

Gussy's body has undergone (probably) irreversible changes as a result of being so overweight for so long. Yes, some people can eat crappy foods in moderation. He probably can't.

That's why the heroin analogy is not so off base. Nobody is saying sugar = heroin. We're saying that gussy is an addict. We don't tell heroin addicts to just cut back a little, because that's a recipe for failure for that person, even though there are plenty of other people that have used heroin socially without it ruining their lives. Same thing here. Gussy can't look at how his skinny friend eats and drinks as an example. He's not like his skinny friend.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found Pure Protein bars very helpful to have around when I want a snack and would choose something worse. Only 3 grams of sugar and they encourage you to drink water when you eat it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Gussy isn't going to make it on chicken, veggies and granola.

What wrong with chicken, vegetables and granola? Why can't he eat those things? I had some granola for breakfast this morning. This stuff. It's delicious. It's not perfect but it's miles better than what he's eating now. You're telling him to eat an egg mcmuffin every day? He's addicted to salt, fat and hydrogenated oils. They dominate every meal he eats. Look at the ingredients of an egg mcmuffin. It's fat, sodium, oil and god knows what else. 730 mg's of sodium. He has high BP. How is that good for someone who's trying to get healthy? Here are the ingredients of the smart ones sandwich he had this morning:

Ingredients: English Muffin (Water, Enriched Flour [bleached Wheat Flour, Malted Barley Flour, Niacin, Reduced Iron, Thiamine Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid], Whole Grain Wheat Flour, Yeast, Contains Less Than 2% of Acetylated Potato Starch, Calcium Sulfate, Degermed Yellow Corn Flour, Degermed Yellow Cornmeal, Fumaric Acid, Potassium Sorbate [Preservative], Salt, Soybean Oil, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Vinegar, Wheat Gluten), Cooked Egg White Patty (Egg Whites, Cornstarch, Xanthan Gum, Annatto ), Cooked Turkey Breakfast Sausage Patties (Poultry Ingredients [Turkey, Mechanically Separated Turkey], Water, Contains 2% Or Less of Salt, Spices, Sugar, Natural Flavoring), Pasteurized Process American Cheese (Cultured Milk, Water, Cream, Sodium Phosphate, Salt, Lactic Acid, Sorbic Acid, Artificial Color, Sodium Citrate, Enzymes). Contains Wheat, Egg, Milk.

How can anyone read those ingredients, see the nutritional information and believe this is a good meal to start the day?

I agree that he's getting bombarded with too much information and strategy. How about going super simple and just trying to eat ONE good meal? For dinner one night this week plan one piece of lean meat or fish with some healthy vegetables. Vegetables that aren't overly salted or served in a cheese sauce. Just something like broiled fish, green beans and a yam. Basic and easy. Just one single meal. Start there. Worry about nothing beyond that. One healthy meal. Call it "the beginning".

Yeah, he can eat healthy foods, no one is saying otherwise. He's already basically said he doesn't want to eat like you do. My point is that he isn't going to subsist on granola and berries. He's said as much. So if he's not going to do that is he a lost cause? No. He can do what many others do and lose weight in a way that makes sense for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arizona Ron is wrong. Sugar isn't heroin. It's not dangerous. You can't overdose on it and die. Those type of statements are ludicrous and don't help anyone.

But sugar can kill you over a long period of time if you over-consume. It also can be consumed in moderation and be part of a perfectly fine lifestyle. What makes more sense: helping someone learn to eat sugar properly, or telling someone to do without something because it's "crap"?

Gussy's body has undergone (probably) irreversible changes as a result of being so overweight for so long. Yes, some people can eat crappy foods in moderation. He probably can't.

That's why the heroin analogy is not so off base. Nobody is saying sugar = heroin. We're saying that gussy is an addict. We don't tell heroin addicts to just cut back a little, because that's a recipe for failure for that person, even though there are plenty of other people that have used heroin socially without it ruining their lives. Same thing here. Gussy can't look at how his skinny friend eats and drinks as an example. He's not like his skinny friend.

I agree. But there are many factors that have contributed to it. Plenty of extremely fat people (people in far worse shape than gussy) have lost weight just cutting back. You CAN cut back and lose weight. That's my point. He doesn't have to go cold turkey. He can cut back and control it. It's possible. Portion control, counting calories...these things work. Are they easy? Heck no. But neither is cutting out all the crap food either. Either option requires commitment. Also, he may find that after cutting back, he's happier on the days where he eats healthier food and work himself into a healthier diet.

I'm not advocating the twinkie diet guys. I'm saying that he has a weight problem because he eats too much food and drinks a lot. If he eats less food and drinks MUCH LESS, he will lose weight.

Edited by shader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He can do what many others do and lose weight in a way that makes sense for him.

"Many others" do not go from obese to a healthy weight and keep it off. The percentage of people that try to do this and fail is well over 90%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Gussy isn't going to make it on chicken, veggies and granola.

What wrong with chicken, vegetables and granola? Why can't he eat those things? I had some granola for breakfast this morning. This stuff. It's delicious. It's not perfect but it's miles better than what he's eating now. You're telling him to eat an egg mcmuffin every day? He's addicted to salt, fat and hydrogenated oils. They dominate every meal he eats. Look at the ingredients of an egg mcmuffin. It's fat, sodium, oil and god knows what else. 730 mg's of sodium. He has high BP. How is that good for someone who's trying to get healthy? Here are the ingredients of the smart ones sandwich he had this morning:

Ingredients: English Muffin (Water, Enriched Flour [bleached Wheat Flour, Malted Barley Flour, Niacin, Reduced Iron, Thiamine Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid], Whole Grain Wheat Flour, Yeast, Contains Less Than 2% of Acetylated Potato Starch, Calcium Sulfate, Degermed Yellow Corn Flour, Degermed Yellow Cornmeal, Fumaric Acid, Potassium Sorbate [Preservative], Salt, Soybean Oil, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Vinegar, Wheat Gluten), Cooked Egg White Patty (Egg Whites, Cornstarch, Xanthan Gum, Annatto ), Cooked Turkey Breakfast Sausage Patties (Poultry Ingredients [Turkey, Mechanically Separated Turkey], Water, Contains 2% Or Less of Salt, Spices, Sugar, Natural Flavoring), Pasteurized Process American Cheese (Cultured Milk, Water, Cream, Sodium Phosphate, Salt, Lactic Acid, Sorbic Acid, Artificial Color, Sodium Citrate, Enzymes). Contains Wheat, Egg, Milk.

How can anyone read those ingredients, see the nutritional information and believe this is a good meal to start the day?

I agree that he's getting bombarded with too much information and strategy. How about going super simple and just trying to eat ONE good meal? For dinner one night this week plan one piece of lean meat or fish with some healthy vegetables. Vegetables that aren't overly salted or served in a cheese sauce. Just something like broiled fish, green beans and a yam. Basic and easy. Just one single meal. Start there. Worry about nothing beyond that. One healthy meal. Call it "the beginning".

Yeah, he can eat healthy foods, no one is saying otherwise. He's already basically said he doesn't want to eat like you do. My point is that he isn't going to subsist on granola and berries. He's said as much. So if he's not going to do that is he a lost cause? No. He can do what many others do and lose weight in a way that makes sense for him.

It doesn't have to be all granola and berries but it can be healthier foods. Even the salad he had today without the dressing had 1200+ mg's of sodium according to their website. Loaded with hydrogenated oils. It contains breaded and fried chicken as well as fried tortilla strips and this was a good meal by his standards. Nobody is saying it all has to be perfect but when your "good" meal involves fried chicken and tortilla chips you need a reality check. I know he's doing his best and I'm rooting for the guy. I'm trying to help by pointing out what he thinks is eating better isn't really eating well. Eating well isn't easy, I get that but once he breaks his addiction from hydrogenated oils, fat and sodium and after he goes through the withdrawals, he's going to feel great and truly will be on the path to good health.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm coming around on the idea that the first phase (21-28 days) of a weight loss routine needs to be something relatively extreme, whether it be some sort of fasting protocol, an all juice diet, atkins type induction phase, whatever. This plus a light exercise routine of walking, or something along those lines. You have to have a clean break and it needs to be a rather large shock, but not one that goes on forever.

All these crash diets work, very well actually. But they aren't sustainable. Once finished with their protocol the key is the transition. For me the definition of that will look drastically different person to person. I would favor something along the lines of an 80/20 paleo/primal type structure with heavy resistance training in the mix. Whole foods and compound lifting with or without weights, but working up to weights as quickly as is practical.

The shock to the system the first 21-28 days puts you in a new idea of what eating is and gets you to come down from all the sugar and high carb diets that americans favor. The second phase is more a lifestyle change with exercise but food is by far the largest component.

Counting calories and all that just seems like a lot of work to me and is prone to measurement error and all that comes with it. Eat mostly plants, get enough protein, drink water. For most people eating like that they simply CAN'T eat too many calories. And in the second phase you have to guard against losing muscle, which is quite easy to do and the main reason why people fail (imo).

That being said this guy is going to fail, and hard. Otis at least can get a phase 1 done, it's the transition that he trips on. This guy won't get out of the starting blocks and will die early, but that's his choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought yesterday was Day 1, but I was a giant ### to myself and ruined a perfectly good day with a bad decision.

Today is Day 1.

The biggest hurdle to me (BESIDES EATING TOO MUCH) is sleep. Every damn time with the sleep. I think it's a waste, I want my time... I'm so selfish with it. I've gotten over 7 hours each night the past 5 nights. I still hate missing 2 hours in my day, but I do feel better already. Teaching myself to value my sleep/health over what I would have been doing.

Walking begins again today, probably the first time I've walked on a weekday since June. I was going to wait til January with the exercise, some excuse about the holidays, but again thread empowerment kicking me into gear to do it now.

Intake today (Day 1)

Coffee (black) - no problems here, prefer black coffee to any other variety

Quaker Instant Oatmeal Lower Sugar Apples & Cinnamon - breakfast every day = my other habitual struggle.

Water

Diet Dr Pepper

Grilled chicken breast

Green Giant Vegetables (Steamers Antioxidants Blend) - the whole damn box.

The above lunch was a staple during my diet. It's frozen and then nuked in the microwave, which probably isn't ideal.

Water

(Planned) Water

(Planned) Boston Butt, smoked - finishing off leftovers from the weekend

(Planned) Sweet potato - with cinnamon, no sugar

I've done all this before, I can stick to a plan if I have a goal. I need to work on making it a lifetime goal, not just some arbitrary point and then it all goes to me=>whale again.

We're gonna make it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of extremely fat people (people in far worse shape than gussy) have lost weight just cutting back.

Virtually all of those people gained it back.

The most important thing is building sustainable habits, which translate into a lifestyle over time. By and large I think all the advice given I this thread has been good. They are all strategies that can help. The challenge for gussy will be figuring out how to build the habits that he can sustain. My main advice to people is not to think about diet as a short term exercise to lose weight. Think of diet as the ongoing process of building and keeping a healthy body. The weight will come off as part of the process, but shouldn't be the goal in and of itself so the process doesn't stop.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of extremely fat people (people in far worse shape than gussy) have lost weight just cutting back.

Virtually all of those people gained it back.

According to this link: http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-overall-diets/data

Weight Watchers is the highest ranked plan for long term results. I don't agree with your assertions on calories or weight watchers, unless you can also provide data on the long term viability of other eating plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of extremely fat people (people in far worse shape than gussy) have lost weight just cutting back.

Virtually all of those people gained it back.

According to this link: http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-overall-diets/data

Weight Watchers is the highest ranked plan for long term results. I don't agree with your assertions on calories or weight watchers, unless you can also provide data on the long term viability of other eating plans.

That's not a study, that's just a ranking by a panel of experts. The experts are listed here. I don't know how each of these people determined the relative strengths and weaknesses of 35 different diets, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say they weren't all that rigorous in their determinations.

Here's an article from Slate talking about how Weight Watchers (and other commercial diets) are almost always failures: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/11/03/why_weight_watchers_doesn_t_work.html. There are a million similar articles out there you can find by googling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of extremely fat people (people in far worse shape than gussy) have lost weight just cutting back.

Virtually all of those people gained it back.

According to this link: http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-overall-diets/data

Weight Watchers is the highest ranked plan for long term results. I don't agree with your assertions on calories or weight watchers, unless you can also provide data on the long term viability of other eating plans.

That's not a study, that's just a ranking by a panel of experts. The experts are listed here. I don't know how each of these people determined the relative strengths and weaknesses of 35 different diets, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say they weren't all that rigorous in their determinations.

Here's an article from Slate talking about how Weight Watchers (and other commercial diets) are almost always failures: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/11/03/why_weight_watchers_doesn_t_work.html. There are a million similar articles out there you can find by googling.

Weight watchers is nothing more than If It Fits Your Macros IIFYM with a 55C/25P/15F overlay and support group meetings. Incidentally, this is roughly the same IIFYM % breakdown for bodybuilders looking to gain weight on a bulk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of extremely fat people (people in far worse shape than gussy) have lost weight just cutting back.

Virtually all of those people gained it back.

According to this link: http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-overall-diets/data

Weight Watchers is the highest ranked plan for long term results. I don't agree with your assertions on calories or weight watchers, unless you can also provide data on the long term viability of other eating plans.

That's not a study, that's just a ranking by a panel of experts. The experts are listed here. I don't know how each of these people determined the relative strengths and weaknesses of 35 different diets, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say they weren't all that rigorous in their determinations.

Here's an article from Slate talking about how Weight Watchers (and other commercial diets) are almost always failures: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/11/03/why_weight_watchers_doesn_t_work.html. There are a million similar articles out there you can find by googling.

So you are going to toss that ranking out because you found a slate article that condemns weight watchers longterm?

I decided to do a quick google search using a NEUTRAL search "is weight watchers successful long term". I think you'll find that the results don't really seem to match the "million similar articles" that you've posted.

What you are doing is exactly what I said people do earlier. You have a certain "plan" that you insist on, and you are insisting that others aren't as successful. This is counter productive. Heck, other people are in here saying that gussy is doomed to die early. What's wrong with you guys?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3027505/Diets-like-Weight-Watchers-Atkins-effective-long-term.html

Researchers found that Atkins and Weight Watchers were 2 plans that showed the most effective long-term weight loss. I'm not going to sit here and play "link games" with you because I don't need to. The facts are that there are successful people that lose weight counting calories. There are successful people that lose weight on Atkins, primal, paleo, the Mediterranean diet, etc. Most diets fail and most people that go cold turkey into a 100% healthy eating lifestyle ultimately fall back to pizza and crap food too.

Once again, the arguing among people of what will and won't work is counter-productive. Your plan will work, my plan will work, JD's plan will work...they will all work. What matters the most is that gussy finds one that works for him and sticks to it. Insisting that he should do it a certain way is not helpful, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found Pure Protein bars very helpful to have around when I want a snack and would choose something worse. Only 3 grams of sugar and they encourage you to drink water when you eat it.

Be careful of maltitol I think its called. Alcohol sugar that doesn't have to be listed as sugar...3g of sugar but who knows if the maltitol might be =to more sugar than you think fyi.

Trader Joe's turkey jerky for that protein fill up :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be back but add me as a friend on myfitnesspal.

Lsuwhodat

Also if you have a Fitbit I will start wearing mine again and we can compete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two diets I've had success with are/were Weight Watchers, but I agree, after a while, it gets depressing thinking "this is how I have to eat for the rest of my life", and the Dukan Diet. On the Dukan, which is more of a "shock to the system" type of diet, I was hungry the first couple of days. By the end of the first week I couldn't even stomach thinking about going back to real food. The re-introduction phase is where I ended up losing it. I probably lost 12 or 14 pounds that first week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two diets I've had success with are/were Weight Watchers, but I agree, after a while, it gets depressing thinking "this is how I have to eat for the rest of my life", and the Dukan Diet. On the Dukan, which is more of a "shock to the system" type of diet, I was hungry the first couple of days. By the end of the first week I couldn't even stomach thinking about going back to real food. The re-introduction phase is where I ended up losing it. I probably lost 12 or 14 pounds that first week.

Alcoholics feel the same way..."this how I have to live the rest of my life"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gussy, you can lose weight and keep it off long term if you're aware of why we gain weight (excess calories) and have a strategy to combat that. If you're not extreme, don't expect immediate results, are patient, and accept the fact that you'll fall of the wagon from time to time, you can be successful long term.

Keep it simple and don't forget some form of exercise so you can build a healthy heart.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two diets I've had success with are/were Weight Watchers, but I agree, after a while, it gets depressing thinking "this is how I have to eat for the rest of my life", and the Dukan Diet. On the Dukan, which is more of a "shock to the system" type of diet, I was hungry the first couple of days. By the end of the first week I couldn't even stomach thinking about going back to real food. The re-introduction phase is where I ended up losing it. I probably lost 12 or 14 pounds that first week.

There is no way you can eat the way you currently eat. You have to change. Subconsciously, many times we feel that once we diet and get healthy, we can then go back to our old ways, but just "control it" better.

But that's not going to happen. If you do weight watchers or myfitnesspal, you don't have to eat that way for the rest of your life. Once you are at a goal weight, you can then add calories back to your diet to get to maintenance. But you can never go back to the way you ate/lived before.

Mentally that's the key. Committing to a complete change longterm.

Edited by shader
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the difference with this time as opposed to the others is I've just come to the realization that anything that has me losing a bunch fast is probably not going to work. I'm going to weight myself weekly. My goal of a lb a week puts me about back to where I was when I met my wife. IN A YEAR. It would take close to 2 years to get down to my goal of 185. I'm fine with that. I'd bet money that I'll be down more than a lb this first week, just because I'm actually trying to care for more than a day, which I've not in a while. But I also know unless I don't get more extreme, the pace will slow. I'm just trying to find my way at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of extremely fat people (people in far worse shape than gussy) have lost weight just cutting back.

Virtually all of those people gained it back.

According to this link: http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-overall-diets/data

Weight Watchers is the highest ranked plan for long term results. I don't agree with your assertions on calories or weight watchers, unless you can also provide data on the long term viability of other eating plans.

That's not a study, that's just a ranking by a panel of experts. The experts are listed here. I don't know how each of these people determined the relative strengths and weaknesses of 35 different diets, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say they weren't all that rigorous in their determinations.

Here's an article from Slate talking about how Weight Watchers (and other commercial diets) are almost always failures: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/11/03/why_weight_watchers_doesn_t_work.html. There are a million similar articles out there you can find by googling.

So you are going to toss that ranking out because you found a slate article that condemns weight watchers longterm?

I decided to do a quick google search using a NEUTRAL search "is weight watchers successful long term". I think you'll find that the results don't really seem to match the "million similar articles" that you've posted.

What you are doing is exactly what I said people do earlier. You have a certain "plan" that you insist on, and you are insisting that others aren't as successful. This is counter productive. Heck, other people are in here saying that gussy is doomed to die early. What's wrong with you guys?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3027505/Diets-like-Weight-Watchers-Atkins-effective-long-term.html

Researchers found that Atkins and Weight Watchers were 2 plans that showed the most effective long-term weight loss. I'm not going to sit here and play "link games" with you because I don't need to. The facts are that there are successful people that lose weight counting calories. There are successful people that lose weight on Atkins, primal, paleo, the Mediterranean diet, etc. Most diets fail and most people that go cold turkey into a 100% healthy eating lifestyle ultimately fall back to pizza and crap food too.

Once again, the arguing among people of what will and won't work is counter-productive. Your plan will work, my plan will work, JD's plan will work...they will all work. What matters the most is that gussy finds one that works for him and sticks to it. Insisting that he should do it a certain way is not helpful, imo.

The article you posted counts one year as "long term."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the difference with this time as opposed to the others is I've just come to the realization that anything that has me losing a bunch fast is probably not going to work. I'm going to weight myself weekly. My goal of a lb a week puts me about back to where I was when I met my wife. IN A YEAR. It would take close to 2 years to get down to my goal of 185. I'm fine with that. I'd bet money that I'll be down more than a lb this first week, just because I'm actually trying to care for more than a day, which I've not in a while. But I also know unless I don't get more extreme, the pace will slow. I'm just trying to find my way at this point.

Count me in as another FBG rooting for you.

I still think you have to get your wife on board. This would be a lot easier with the support of your wife. You guys could plan meals together. You could take turns packing lunches for each other.

I am impressed that you have cut back on the booze. I think that is a huge step. Now start drinking a lot more water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I DRINK A TON OF WATER, lol. I think people keep missing this. I said it earlier, I've always said it's all that keeps me alive, or keeps me from being 350 instead of 250. I'll keep drinking lots of water gb :) Wife is on board in that she decided to start with this trainer before I decided that this would be a good opportunity for me to turn things around. I've kind of told her I'm trying to behave and eat better. At the party the other night, after I had my vodka soda, I filled my cup back up with just water. When I was walking downstairs she said "I thought you said you weren't drinking much tonight". When I told her it was just water she didn't believe me, then she's like "why the lime?" I said that I just filled my glass back up with water. I tried to call her bluff by turning it in to a sex bet (BJ :) ) She quickly backed down, lol. I think we just need to talk about eating at home more often and being healthier when we do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plenty of extremely fat people (people in far worse shape than gussy) have lost weight just cutting back.

Virtually all of those people gained it back.

According to this link: http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-overall-diets/data

Weight Watchers is the highest ranked plan for long term results. I don't agree with your assertions on calories or weight watchers, unless you can also provide data on the long term viability of other eating plans.

That's not a study, that's just a ranking by a panel of experts. The experts are listed here. I don't know how each of these people determined the relative strengths and weaknesses of 35 different diets, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say they weren't all that rigorous in their determinations.

Here's an article from Slate talking about how Weight Watchers (and other commercial diets) are almost always failures: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/11/03/why_weight_watchers_doesn_t_work.html. There are a million similar articles out there you can find by googling.

So you are going to toss that ranking out because you found a slate article that condemns weight watchers longterm?

I decided to do a quick google search using a NEUTRAL search "is weight watchers successful long term". I think you'll find that the results don't really seem to match the "million similar articles" that you've posted.

What you are doing is exactly what I said people do earlier. You have a certain "plan" that you insist on, and you are insisting that others aren't as successful. This is counter productive. Heck, other people are in here saying that gussy is doomed to die early. What's wrong with you guys?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3027505/Diets-like-Weight-Watchers-Atkins-effective-long-term.html

Researchers found that Atkins and Weight Watchers were 2 plans that showed the most effective long-term weight loss. I'm not going to sit here and play "link games" with you because I don't need to. The facts are that there are successful people that lose weight counting calories. There are successful people that lose weight on Atkins, primal, paleo, the Mediterranean diet, etc. Most diets fail and most people that go cold turkey into a 100% healthy eating lifestyle ultimately fall back to pizza and crap food too.

Once again, the arguing among people of what will and won't work is counter-productive. Your plan will work, my plan will work, JD's plan will work...they will all work. What matters the most is that gussy finds one that works for him and sticks to it. Insisting that he should do it a certain way is not helpful, imo.

The article you posted counts one year as "long term."

Like I said, I'm not playing link games with you. I don't agree with your assertion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright dude, I'm going to give you a simple, straightforward plan to lose weight.

Step 1, Worry about calories only. Not macros or sugar or ingredients, calories only. Of course you should mix in veggies and healthy food, but calories are they key to losing weight.

Step 2, evaluate your results not daily, but weekly. If you're successful 5 days and unsuccessful 2 days, it's likely you'll still be good for the week.

Step 3, mix in some low impact exercise like walking a couple of times/week.

Here's the plan, your TDEE (basically the calories you burn just being alive and going about life with no exercise) is around 2,450/day. Your goal should be to consume between 500 - 750 calories fewer than this per day. So that gives you an allocation of in the neighborhood of 1,800 calories per day. I don't care where your calories come from, if you stay around 1,800/day, you'll lose weight. Next, the booze, you have got to limit it to no more than 2x/week max. Even limiting it this much can still cause problems for you. Say on the two days you booze, your calories increase to 4,000/day. These two days alone result in a 3,100 calorie excess, eating up all but 650 calories of the other five days (assuming you average 1,800/day). Now here's where the walking comes in. For every 1/2 hour you walk at a reasonable pace, assume you'll burn around 100 calories. Say you walk 2.5 hours/week, that's an additional burn of 500 calories which would give you a 1,150 calorie deficit for the week. This is with going off the rails twice. Not a huge deficit but a deficit nonethelss. In enough time, you'll reach your goals. If you can limit the damage on the booze days or walk more, you'll have even better results.

I always think in terms of not trying to be perfect but for every step back, take three forward.

By the time summer comes you won't recognize yourself.

This is great. Similar to my post but more logical and easier to understand. Do this gussy. Don't let 100 people cloud your mind. Go simple.

I agree 100% with this as well. There are some diet nerds on this board that just love talking about this stuff and complicate the hell out of this, I don't know how anyone that's just starting out can read these threads and not feel just overwhelmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright dude, I'm going to give you a simple, straightforward plan to lose weight.

Step 1, Worry about calories only. Not macros or sugar or ingredients, calories only. Of course you should mix in veggies and healthy food, but calories are they key to losing weight.

Step 2, evaluate your results not daily, but weekly. If you're successful 5 days and unsuccessful 2 days, it's likely you'll still be good for the week.

Step 3, mix in some low impact exercise like walking a couple of times/week.

Here's the plan, your TDEE (basically the calories you burn just being alive and going about life with no exercise) is around 2,450/day. Your goal should be to consume between 500 - 750 calories fewer than this per day. So that gives you an allocation of in the neighborhood of 1,800 calories per day. I don't care where your calories come from, if you stay around 1,800/day, you'll lose weight. Next, the booze, you have got to limit it to no more than 2x/week max. Even limiting it this much can still cause problems for you. Say on the two days you booze, your calories increase to 4,000/day. These two days alone result in a 3,100 calorie excess, eating up all but 650 calories of the other five days (assuming you average 1,800/day). Now here's where the walking comes in. For every 1/2 hour you walk at a reasonable pace, assume you'll burn around 100 calories. Say you walk 2.5 hours/week, that's an additional burn of 500 calories which would give you a 1,150 calorie deficit for the week. This is with going off the rails twice. Not a huge deficit but a deficit nonethelss. In enough time, you'll reach your goals. If you can limit the damage on the booze days or walk more, you'll have even better results.

I always think in terms of not trying to be perfect but for every step back, take three forward.

By the time summer comes you won't recognize yourself.

This is great. Similar to my post but more logical and easier to understand. Do this gussy. Don't let 100 people cloud your mind. Go simple.

I agree 100% with this as well. There are some diet nerds on this board that just love talking about this stuff and complicate the hell out of this, I don't know how anyone that's just starting out can read these threads and not feel just overwhelmed.

I believe for the time being, this is what I'm comfortable with. I can make a concentrated effort to try to eat better foods, and I will, but at the end of the day, the easiest thing for me, with my current life, is watch my calories, cut WAY back on the booze and force myself to get some light cardio in. It's a hell of a lot better than what I've been doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you do calories long-term and stick to it, you'll eventually cut most of the crap out of your diet anyway. You'll learn what things totally ruin your day, and what things don't. For instance, regular coke and all kinds of juices are fine if you are counting calories. But since those are the emptiest of empty calories and since they do not satiate you at all, you'll move away from those for the most part, because you'll see how little food you can have if you waste calories on stuff that stimulates hunger and doesn't make you full.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright dude, I'm going to give you a simple, straightforward plan to lose weight.

Step 1, Worry about calories only. Not macros or sugar or ingredients, calories only. Of course you should mix in veggies and healthy food, but calories are they key to losing weight.

Step 2, evaluate your results not daily, but weekly. If you're successful 5 days and unsuccessful 2 days, it's likely you'll still be good for the week.

Step 3, mix in some low impact exercise like walking a couple of times/week.

Here's the plan, your TDEE (basically the calories you burn just being alive and going about life with no exercise) is around 2,450/day. Your goal should be to consume between 500 - 750 calories fewer than this per day. So that gives you an allocation of in the neighborhood of 1,800 calories per day. I don't care where your calories come from, if you stay around 1,800/day, you'll lose weight. Next, the booze, you have got to limit it to no more than 2x/week max. Even limiting it this much can still cause problems for you. Say on the two days you booze, your calories increase to 4,000/day. These two days alone result in a 3,100 calorie excess, eating up all but 650 calories of the other five days (assuming you average 1,800/day). Now here's where the walking comes in. For every 1/2 hour you walk at a reasonable pace, assume you'll burn around 100 calories. Say you walk 2.5 hours/week, that's an additional burn of 500 calories which would give you a 1,150 calorie deficit for the week. This is with going off the rails twice. Not a huge deficit but a deficit nonethelss. In enough time, you'll reach your goals. If you can limit the damage on the booze days or walk more, you'll have even better results.

I always think in terms of not trying to be perfect but for every step back, take three forward.

By the time summer comes you won't recognize yourself.

This is great. Similar to my post but more logical and easier to understand. Do this gussy. Don't let 100 people cloud your mind. Go simple.

I agree 100% with this as well. There are some diet nerds on this board that just love talking about this stuff and complicate the hell out of this, I don't know how anyone that's just starting out can read these threads and not feel just overwhelmed.

I believe for the time being, this is what I'm comfortable with. I can make a concentrated effort to try to eat better foods, and I will, but at the end of the day, the easiest thing for me, with my current life, is watch my calories, cut WAY back on the booze and force myself to get some light cardio in. It's a hell of a lot better than what I've been doing.

I think you are on the right track. You have to do what you think will work for you. I could not live on beets and granola either! You can adjust your plan after a few months to make better progress if necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Step 1, Worry about calories only. Not macros or sugar or ingredients, calories only. Of course you should mix in veggies and healthy food, but calories are they key to losing weight.

A diet of 2000 calories from 2000 calories of sugar has a vastly different response by the body than a diet of 2000 calories with only 200 calories from sugar. Likewise a diet with 500 calories of sugar affects the body different than a diet of 200 calories of sugar.

If you want proof, then just recall the anti-fat campaign that hit our culture in the 80's, where food manufactures replaced the fat in food with sugar to make it "low fat" and "no fat". The result was society got even fatter.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright dude, I'm going to give you a simple, straightforward plan to lose weight.

Step 1, Worry about calories only. Not macros or sugar or ingredients, calories only. Of course you should mix in veggies and healthy food, but calories are they key to losing weight.

Step 2, evaluate your results not daily, but weekly. If you're successful 5 days and unsuccessful 2 days, it's likely you'll still be good for the week.

Step 3, mix in some low impact exercise like walking a couple of times/week.

Here's the plan, your TDEE (basically the calories you burn just being alive and going about life with no exercise) is around 2,450/day. Your goal should be to consume between 500 - 750 calories fewer than this per day. So that gives you an allocation of in the neighborhood of 1,800 calories per day. I don't care where your calories come from, if you stay around 1,800/day, you'll lose weight. Next, the booze, you have got to limit it to no more than 2x/week max. Even limiting it this much can still cause problems for you. Say on the two days you booze, your calories increase to 4,000/day. These two days alone result in a 3,100 calorie excess, eating up all but 650 calories of the other five days (assuming you average 1,800/day). Now here's where the walking comes in. For every 1/2 hour you walk at a reasonable pace, assume you'll burn around 100 calories. Say you walk 2.5 hours/week, that's an additional burn of 500 calories which would give you a 1,150 calorie deficit for the week. This is with going off the rails twice. Not a huge deficit but a deficit nonethelss. In enough time, you'll reach your goals. If you can limit the damage on the booze days or walk more, you'll have even better results.

I always think in terms of not trying to be perfect but for every step back, take three forward.

By the time summer comes you won't recognize yourself.

This is great. Similar to my post but more logical and easier to understand. Do this gussy. Don't let 100 people cloud your mind. Go simple.

I agree 100% with this as well. There are some diet nerds on this board that just love talking about this stuff and complicate the hell out of this, I don't know how anyone that's just starting out can read these threads and not feel just overwhelmed.

I believe for the time being, this is what I'm comfortable with. I can make a concentrated effort to try to eat better foods, and I will, but at the end of the day, the easiest thing for me, with my current life, is watch my calories, cut WAY back on the booze and force myself to get some light cardio in. It's a hell of a lot better than what I've been doing.

I'd do yourself a favor and stop reading this thread. You know what you need to do. The diet nerds mean well, but they just can't help themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stopped by the store on the way home and tried to pick up some healthy snacks I can keep at the office to get me through my days. Picked up 3 red delicious apples, 3 bartlett pears, 2 bags of Willie Neslon's granola, I got the original cinnamon and also the maple-icious pecan. It is really good, although might be better with skim milk as a cereal for breakfast for me. Also got a bag of turkey jerky. It's "meh". Certainly not beef or deer jerky. I do have some deer jerky coming from the buck my son took recently. Also got some sugar snap peas. I love hummus, but I usually eat it with tostitos. I tried it with celery yesterday, and it was ok, but I think I'll like it better with sugar snap peas. Also got home in time to get a 25 minute walk in. It was beautiful here today. 56 degrees in December is crazy. Supposed to be better tomorrow. Wife is making a chicken breast with red peppers, sauteed onions and mushrooms and I'm sure some kind of mustard sauce for dinner.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.